Hot Topics:

Open Forum: Letter printed Dec. 3

Posted:
12/02/2012 10:42:38 PM MST

Benghazi developments offer chilling view

To the editor:

Regarding your editorial on Benghazi: It stated President Obama and U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice did not say for days after that it was an organized terrorist attack for reasons of safety and security. This is an understatement of the problem. They repeatedly said it was a spontaneous attack caused by a video that was offensive to Muslims. This was a clear misrepresentation of the facts which have been presented by the CIA.

The CIA chief in Libya sent a cable to Washington on Sept. 12, the day after the attack, stating that it was a terrorist attack. If the president and Ambassador Rice were concerned about exposing clandestine operations, they could have simply not discussed certain aspects of the events.

Yet nearly a week after the attack, Rice went public to blame it on the video. Two weeks after the attack, President Obama cited the video six times in relation to the attack in a speech to the United Nations.

There are additional problematic events:

CIA Director David Petraeus testified that his report of al-Qaida groups involved in the attack was edited to take out references to the terrorist groups;

Several U.S. officials, including Christopher Stevens who was killed in the attack, reported that security was inadequate at Benghazi and had made requests for additional security. Why were these warnings and requests denied or ignored? A State Department report detailing the security problems at Benghazi was circulated to the White House just three weeks before the attack;

President Obama claims that after the attack began he ordered whatever steps were necessary to secure the personnel, yet the CIA and White House reported they did not deny any requests for help. Why this conflict of information? When Americans serving our country are killed, the president and federal officials have an obligation to provide the truth to their families and the American people. If the explanation that covert operations might be revealed is allowed to prevent the sharing of truthful information, then our government is impervious to scrutiny and the accountability required to prevent it from becoming tyrannical.

Article Comments

We reserve the right to remove any comment that violates our ground rules, is spammy, NSFW, defamatory, rude, reckless to the community, etc.

We expect everyone to be respectful of other commenters. It's fine to have differences of opinion, but there's no need to act like a jerk.

Use your own words (don't copy and paste from elsewhere), be honest and don't pretend to be someone (or something) you're not.

Our commenting section is self-policing, so if you see a comment that violates our ground rules, flag it (mouse over to the far right of the commenter's name until you see the flag symbol and click that), then we'll review it.